Visionary despot required to rule Kenya - others need not apply

Judy Munyinyi

An old friend was fond of saying the only way for Kenya to get ahead was if she got a visionary despot to be the leader of this (potentially) great nation.

Microsoft’s Encarta Encyclopedia defines a despot as an absolute ruler, unrestricted by any legal or constitutional process. Modern usage has given the word connotations of cruel and oppressive policies and so I had always hotly disagreed with this pal because who wants to be led by a tyrant?

But if for a moment we put aside the negative connotation of the word despot, and look at the original Greek usage, it simply meant the master of a household and the possessor of unlimited power, as in the case of a provincial governor. In some parts of the world, the term despot was even used as a title of honor and bishops and patriarchs of the Greek Church were despots.

In the years since I first heard the theory of the visionary despot, I have looked long and hard at our country and even our businesses and must grudgingly concede that perhaps he had a point.

As I see it, the problem with our Kenyan hooligans, which is what my aunty Lilly calls our politicians, is that they are either visionary or despotic and very rarely both. Parliament is filled with despotic (negative connotation applied here) leaders and perhaps just a handful who actually have a vision for this country. And of that handful, many lack the backbone to implement their vision, which leaves us in a bit of a quagmire, eh?

Once in a long while a man, or woman, comes along who has both vision and the ability to see their vision through to fruition. Usually, such a person is initially unpopular because he or she is, and indeed has to be, very strong willed in order to fulfill their vision.

Enter Honourable John Michuki. I have always thought quite highly of him but last week nailed things for me when he blasted his Cabinet colleagues for bartering major issues with minor ones (trading Ringera for Mau) and thundered that he was ashamed to be part of such a bunge.

Now that’s my kind of man!

Much as people don’t always like Michuki, they grudgingly admire him, and I have been to many places where I have heard people say that they wish our Bunge (Parliament) had two or three more like him.

Look at how he reformed the public transport sector. Did he not galvanise Kenyans to follow him through thick and thin? That is what a person of vision does. Where have you ever heard of people willingly walking 10km to get to work in order to demonstrate their seriousness to the madmen (and women) who run our transport sector?

And have you not heard the news about the Nairobi River and how it has changed, flowing free and clear in some places?

That is a man with a vision, the ability to communicate it and most importantly, the force of personality (and constitutional power) to enforce it. Why then would a good number of Kenyans not vote for a man like Michuki if he ran for president? All together now…. Because he is Kikuyu!

Which is why Kenya will continue to lag behind developmentally because we are too busy exchanging things that matter for things that won’t make a difference in a few decades to come.

And now speedily away from politics and on to judge Ian Mbugua of Tusker Project Fame. Two weeks ago he tore into the Burundian contestant Christian because of a simple communication error. After a weak performance, one of the judges had told Christian that his performance was wanting. A perfect gentleman, Christian replied ‘it doesn’t matter’ though what he was trying to say was something along the lines of ‘I understand, no problem’ because the judge looked quite uncomfortable telling him he’d failed to impress her. Hothead Ian jumped on that error and ripped Christian to pieces, telling him that with that kind of attitude he would not get anywhere, blah, blah, blah.

Fine.

We’re not all endowed with the ability to understand beyond that which is spoken. However, when Christian was finally being evicted last Sunday, and by now Ian in the picture concerning what the hapless French speaker had been trying to communicate, I’d have expected Ian to muster the decency to apologise to the poor fellow for the undeserved bashing the previous week.

But what do you know? The man just sat there and smirked as Christian said his goodbyes.

Perhaps Judge Ian did have a private tÍte-‡-tÍte with Christian, who is to know? But in my opinion, as the bashing was so public, the apology should have been equally public.

That’s how people of integrity do it.